Bombay High Court
Parmeshwar Narsingh Kasabe vs The State Of Maharashtra on 1 December, 2020
Author: Bharati Dangre
Bench: Bharati Dangre
1/7 30 BA-1281.19 (01-12).odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1281 OF 2019
Parmeshwar Narsingh Kasabe .. Applicant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
...
Mr. Sachin H. Deokar for the Applicant.
Mr. S.V. Gavand, A.P.P. for the State.
...
CORAM: SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.
DATED : 01ST DECEMBER, 2020.
P.C:-
1. The Applicant is charge-sheeted for the offence punishable
under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. On
completion of investigation in C.R. No.34 of 2016 registered
with Paud Police Station, Pune Gramin, Dist. Pune, the case is
numbered as Sessions Case No.358 of 2016. The Applicant is
arrested on 19/02/2016 and, presently, he is incarcerated in
Yerawada Central Prison, Pune.
AJN
::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 09/02/2021 11:57:28 :::
2/7 30 BA-1281.19 (01-12).odt
2. The Applicant submits that there is absolutely no evidence
contained in the charge-sheet to implicate him for the offence of
committing murder and, he has been falsely implicated in the
aforesaid offence and the charge-sheet enlist the circumstantial
evidence. Barring the mention of his name in the FIR, there is
no recovery at the instance of the Applicant during the course of
investigation. Learned counsel also submits that no Test
Identification Parade has been conducted so as to connect him to
the alleged crime. He also relied upon the bail order passed in
favour of the co-accused Kiran S. Kamble and claims parity.
3. Heard learned A.P.P. opposing the Application and also
perused the charge-sheet with his assistance. The Complainant
is one Prashant Sitarm Holkar, who lodged the complaint with
Paud Police Station on 13/02/2016 alleging that the Applicant
was residing with one Sheelabai and Accused No.2. It is alleged
that the Applicant was suspicious that deceased Raju, brother of
the Complainant was continuing an illicit relationship with
Sheelabai. On account of the said suspicion, three days prior to
the incident, he had thrashed Sheelabai and threatened that he
will also kill Raju. She, therefore, left the house and informed
the Complainant about the threat given by the Applicant. It is
also stated that on 12/02/2016, the owner of a water tanker with
whom the deceased was working as a helper, informed the
Complainant that his brother had parked the water tanker on the
AJN
::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 09/02/2021 11:57:28 :::
3/7 30 BA-1281.19 (01-12).odt
roadside and left it there. When the informant along with other
persons went near the tanker and searched around the area, in a
proximity of 100 meters, the body of deceased Raju was found
with injuries on his body. The death of his brother was informed
by the Complainant to the Police Station on 13/2/2016, which
resulted into filing of the FIR. The Applicant was arrested on
19/02/2016 and initially remanded to police custody and
thereafter magisterial custody. The Complainant has expressed
his suspicion that the Applicant and his brother Ganpat had done
Raju to death for suspecting that Raju was in relationship with
his wife Sheelabai. In the supplementary statement, the
Complainant modified his version and stated that the person
accompanying the Applicant i.e. Kiran S. Kamble is responsible
for the death of his brother and not Ganpat.
4. The autopsy report referred to several injuries on the
body of deceased Raju and the probable cause of death has
been opined to be cardio-respiratory arrest due to asphyxia
due to hypoglycemic shock due to grievous injuries over
head.
5. Perused the statements recorded during the course of the
investigation. Sheelabai Kamble, the lady, who was residing
with the Applicant as wife has stated that she had developed a
love relationship with deceased Raju since last six months and
they used to meet often. The Applicant gained knowledge of the
AJN
::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 09/02/2021 11:57:28 :::
4/7 30 BA-1281.19 (01-12).odt
said relationship and, on that count, he used to abuse her and, at
times, assault her. She states that on 04/02/2016, the Applicant
had threatened her that he would kill both of them and also
assaulted her by a belt. She states that through the police, she
came to know that the body of deceased Raju was traced and she
stated that the Applicant had killed Raju on the suspicion that she
was having an affair with him.
6. The statements of other witnesses including Usha Holkar,
Kaveri Holkar are also on the same line and are based on
hearsay. Statements of Sitaram Holkar, Narsing Kasabe are also
to the same effect.
7. Learned A.P.P. has relied on the statement of Ganesh
Halande dated 14/02/2016 and submits that this witness has last
seen the deceased in the company of the Applicant. However,
when the statement is perused, the witnesses states that on
11/02/2016 at around 5.45 p.m., he noted one tanker belonging
to Madhukar Marne and near the tanker, deceased Raju was
having a verbal spat with two persons. One person held his
collar and asked him where he has hidden his wife. Another
person was standing nearby. At that time, this witness asked
deceased Raju, what is the cause for the fight but he did not
respond. Thinking that the matter was personal, the witness left
from the spot. The witness had given the description of the
clothes worn by deceased Raju and the other two persons.
AJN
::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 09/02/2021 11:57:28 :::
5/7 30 BA-1281.19 (01-12).odt
However, there is no material in the charge-sheet to demonstrate
that among the two persons, the Applicant was one of them. No
Test Identification Parade has been conducted. The statement of
Ram Halande is also to the same effect. The prosecution has
made no attempt to put the Applicant for identification at the
instance of these two witnesses.
8. There may be several reasons for a person to threaten
another person with dire consequences. However, the burden is
on the prosecution to demonstrate that this threat has resulted
into its actual implementation and this will have to be done by
some reliable and cogent evidence. Sheelabai has referred to the
threat given by the present Applicant that he will kill her and her
paramour deceased Raju and it was known in the village that
they were having an affair but Sheelabai was also not a legally
married wife of the Applicant and she was residing with him for
the last 10 years as if she is his wife.
9. The co-accused Kiran Kamble has already been released
on bail by this Court on 10/10/2017. Prima facie, since the
charge-sheet is lacking in reliable evidence to connect the
present Applicant to the crime in question and in the light of the
fact that the Applicant is incarcerated since 19/02/2016 and it is
almost four years and his attempts to secure his liberty have been
turned down on earlier occasions, keeping in mind the principle
that the long incarceration is unwarranted and since the
AJN
::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 09/02/2021 11:57:28 :::
6/7 30 BA-1281.19 (01-12).odt
Applicant has already been detained for four years, he is entitled
to be released on bail by ensuring that he does not flee the course
of justice. Hence, the following order:
ORDER
(a) The Applicant - Parmeshwar Narsingh Kasabe, shall be released on bail in C.R. No.34 of 2016 registered with Paud Police Station, District Pune on executing P.R. bond to the extent of Rs.25,000/- and furnishing one or two sureties of the like amount.
(b) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with facts of case and shall not tamper with prosecution evidence.
(c) The Applicant shall report to the Paud Police Station once in every month i.e. on every 1st Wednesday of the month between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.
(d) The Applicant shall cooperate with the trial and attend the trial Court on every dates unless exempted by the Court. Consecutive defaults in AJN ::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 09/02/2021 11:57:28 ::: 7/7 30 BA-1281.19 (01-12).odt complying with the attendance would entail cancellation of his bail.
(e) The Applicant shall provide his residential address and telephone number to the Investigating Officer.
10. The Application is allowed in the aforestated terms.
11. All parties are directed to act on the downloaded copy of the order supplied by the Advocate under his seal and signature.
SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.
AJN ::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 09/02/2021 11:57:28 :::